Trigger Locks Would Have Prevented The Latest Mass Shooting

[justashooter 430]

SCOTUS had already declared that any device or practice intended to delay access to or disable a firearm is unconstitutional in Heller (2008). under Heller (Macdonald), no state can implement such law without being in violation of your constitutional right to keep and bear firearms.

please study the subject before you share "great ideas" on "reasonable restrictions".

google is your friend:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

"...the District of Columbia's regulations act was an unconstitutional banning, and struck down the portion of the regulations act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock."

high cap magazines are also protected as "being in common use" under Heller. you cannot ban them.

the silence is deafening.

[Póg mo 1,749]

Have you ever tried to remove one of those "trigger locks" without the key. Takes about 10 minutes. Sure it slows down a small child but any 12 year old that knows how to run a power drill can get it off in a few minutes.

Dude with that attitude, why even bother to lock your own front door? I am sure somebody, given the right motivation, could easily get around almost any lock.

Edited December 16, 2012 by InKorea

[one...two...tree 2,762]

SCOTUS had already declared that any device or practice intended to delay access to or disable a firearm is unconstitutional in Heller (2008). under Heller (Macdonald), no state can implement such law without being in violation of your constitutional right to keep and bear firearms.

please study the subject before you share "great ideas" on "reasonable restrictions".

google is your friend:

http://en.wikipedia....umbia_v._Heller

"...the District of Columbia's regulations act was an unconstitutional banning, and struck down the portion of the regulations act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock."

high cap magazines are also protected as "being in common use" under Heller. you cannot ban them.

from your link:

(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.

(3) The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of "arms" that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition – in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute – would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.

So that means, requiring trigger locks or having firearms locked up when they are stored is NOT unconstitutional except for having a firearm ready for self-defense. In other words, you can keep a gun in your night stand, loaded and ready to use. However, a law could require that the rest of your guns be locked up. As indicated above - the 2nd Amendment rights are NOT absolute - there are limits just as any right.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Lincolns mullet

[DaveE 178]

from your link:

So that means, requiring trigger locks or having firearms locked up when they are stored is NOT unconstitutional except for having a firearm ready for self-defense. In other words, you can keep a gun in your night stand, loaded and ready to use. However, a law could require that the rest of your guns be locked up. As indicated above - the 2nd Amendment rights are NOT absolute - there are limits just as any right.

NO, they specifically applied to rule to any lawful firearm in the home - "Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional"

The purpose is defense and applies to any lawful firearm in the home, not just one on your nightstand.

Edited December 16, 2012 by DaveE

[one...two...tree 2,762]

NO, they specifically applied to rule to any lawful firearm in the home - "Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional"

The purpose is defense and applies to any lawful firearm in the home, not just one on your nightstand.

The part in red - that's called a qualifier. That means there are exceptions - firearms in the home that are not actively being used for self defense. Go look up the current laws in various states on storing guns. If SCOTUS did in fact mean that no laws could require locking up guns, then all these states with laws on the books are null and void. But that's really beside the point. Reasonable gun safety is the center of this thread - and there are ways to make guns safer so that we don't have to live in fear that our children will be gunned down while at school.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The part in red - that's called a qualifier. That means there are exceptions - firearms in the home that are not actively being used for self defense. Go look up the current laws in various states on storing guns. If SCOTUS did in fact mean that no laws could require locking up guns, then all these states with laws on the books are null and void. But that's really beside the point. Reasonable gun safety is the center of this thread - and there are ways to make guns safer so that we don't have to live in fear that our children will be gunned down while at school.

All my guns can and will be used for self defense if the need arises. I have a Mossberg 12 Gauge with pistol grip behind my front door, a loaded S&W 500 hog leg under my mattress, and the wife has her .22 S&W auto in the top drawer of her nightstand and when I'm not home she keeps it on top of her nightstand.

Other than my hunting rifles, all the guns in this house are loaded and ready for action as they should be.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Anyone here against requiring stored guns to have trigger locks? If so, why?

Yes, I am

My house, my gun. Stay the #### out! I keep a loaded gun ON ME while I am awake and in my house. It is safer than a trigger lock since no one is going to play with it.

The title is misleading (reported) what is new from Steven?

The perpetrator of the recent mayhem killed his father and mother, 20 innnocent children, teachers a principal and when faced with ARMED resistance...himself.

You think a trigger lock would prevent that? Seriously? So if his father had trigger locks on all the guns he would not have taken the keys to the trigger locks from his father? I mean where do you get this idea?

"Damn, I woulda killed all those people if only I had the key!"

The moronic BS that spews forth after one of these tradgedies should be followed by a "mouth lock"

Boy, this is just the kind of information your neighborhood home invader would like to know. Thanks for sharing with the world.

I invite you to put a "Gun Free Zone" sign in front of your house. Let's see what the home invaders prefer.

Hmmm, home invasion in Vermont....

So if someone kicks in your front door there's a handy loaded weapon waiting there for them to shoot you with.

The only loaded gun in my house is on my hip. Very handy.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

They were:

This is why I am against trigger locks.

In which state is there LESS home invasion than Vermont?

Let's put it another way...in what state are you SAFER from home invasion?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

This is why I am against trigger locks.

So you think the Curriers had a trigger lock on the stolen firearm. Where did you learn this information?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Which states require locks on guns stored in the home Steven? Should be easy for you to answer if you have a clue.

North Carolina's child access prevention law generally requires that no person shall store or keep any loaded firearm on any premise under their control if it is known or reasonably should be known that a minor age 17 and under is likely to gain access to the firearm with out permission unless the firearm is properly stored.

http://www.safekids....thcarolina.html

.......

Child access prevention (CAP) laws impose criminal liability on adults who negligently leave firearms accessible to children or otherwise allow children access to firearms.

http://smartgunlaws....policy-summary/

........

CONTEXT:

Since 1989, several states have passed laws that make gun owners criminally liable if someone is injured because a child gains unsupervised access to a gun. These laws are controversial, and their effect on firearm-related injuries is unknown.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine if state laws that require safe storage of firearms are associated with a reduction in child mortality due to firearms.

DESIGN:

An ecological study of firearm mortality from 1979 through 1994.

SETTING:

All 50 states and the District of Columbia.

PARTICIPANTS:

All children younger than 15 years.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Unintentional deaths, suicides, and homicides due to firearms.

RESULTS:

Laws that make gun owners responsible for storing firearms in a manner that makes them inaccessible to children were in effect for at least 1 year in 12 states from 1990 through 1994. Among children younger than 15 years, unintentional shooting deaths were reduced by 23% (95% confidence interval, 6%-37%) during the years covered by these laws. This estimate was based on within-state comparisons adjusted for national trends in unintentional firearm-related mortality. Gun-related homicide and suicide showed modest declines, but these were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS:

State safe storage laws intended to make firearms less accessible to children appear to prevent unintentional shooting deaths among children younger than 15 years.

http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/9315767

......

So going back to justashooter's claim that SCOTUS ruled state laws requiring stored guns being locked as unconstitutional is false. States can make laws requiring safe storage of guns and they have done so. The problem, however, is that the current state laws don't have any requirements for guns being locked where there are no children and I'm suggesting that such laws would reduce the chances of future mass shootings such as this latest tragedy. If you want to keep a loaded handgun under your pillow, in a nightstand or in a holster, I support that. What I don't support is allowing people to store several guns in a home unlocked and accessible to anyone. That makes no logical sense.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

In years past, lawmakers tried to enact sensible firearms storage legislation. The Whitney Graves bill, named for the 8-year-old Marysville girl accidentally shot by a playmate in 1996, would have made it a misdemeanor to leave a loaded gun easily accessible to a child.

Gun advocates, including the National Rifle Association, successfully blocked that legislation. If only the NRA had worked as hard to protect children as it is working to get its vanity license plate approved by the Legislature this session.

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/opinion/2012/02/23/childs-shooting-shows-need-for-safe-gun-storage-law/

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/opinion/2012/02/23/childs-shooting-shows-need-for-safe-gun-storage-law/#storylink=cpy

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Yes, I am

My house, my gun. Stay the #### out! I keep a loaded gun ON ME while I am awake and in my house. It is safer than a trigger lock since no one is going to play with it.

The title is misleading (reported) what is new from Steven?

The perpetrator of the recent mayhem killed his father and mother, 20 innnocent children, teachers a principal and when faced with ARMED resistance...himself.

You think a trigger lock would prevent that? Seriously? So if his father had trigger locks on all the guns he would not have taken the keys to the trigger locks from his father? I mean where do you get this idea?

"Damn, I woulda killed all those people if only I had the key!"

The moronic BS that spews forth after one of these tradgedies should be followed by a "mouth lock"

I invite you to put a "Gun Free Zone" sign in front of your house. Let's see what the home invaders prefer.

Hmmm, home invasion in Vermont....

The only loaded gun in my house is on my hip. Very handy.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Which states require locks on guns stored in the home Steven? Should be easy for you to answer if you have a clue.

The children gunned down were gunned down because we made the "safe" in a "gun free" zone. we need to make them safe surrounded by guns, or at least the potential of that. The shooter in this case kept killing UNTIL people arrived with GUNS to stop him (how is it when this happens you call MORE people with guns?) He then shot himself.

Facing unarmed 5 year olds and unarmed teachers is one thing, facing a person trained in firearms use is another. There are no mass shootings in gun shows.

ALL teachers should be trained in firearms use and ALL teachers need to have the option to carry concealed handguns. THAT will end school shootings. Period. Trigger locks in homes will not end school shootings.

Every adult in society should have the right to carry a concealed handgun without any permit or license.

We need to look at the state with the lowest crime rate, the safest state, the state that has never had a police officer killed by gunfire...and copy their gun laws.

Nice! Gary putting a beat down on here.

[Teddy B 17,252]

I can't imagine being so paranoid that I need to have a gun actually on me in my own house at all times. But hey, that's just me.

Any wonder who the real crazies are? We've got heavily armed people living in the 18th century walking around in modern society.

[justashooter 430]

So going back to justashooter's claim that SCOTUS ruled state laws requiring stored guns being locked as unconstitutional is false.

Shooter's cited case law is not yet recognised in all states, though it can be, under the incorporation achieved in MacDonald. changing statute takes time. SCOTUS has provided a framework in which any such storage laws can be effectively nullified by an appropriate court challenge thru a party with proper standing.

changing bad law takes time. but it is happening as we speak. for example, maryland law requiring an onerous CCW "approval" process has recently been declared unconstitutional under Heller and Macdonald, nearly 5 years after Heller was determined.

unconstitutional laws exist in every state. cleaning them up by forcing states to rescind them takes time.

Edited December 17, 2012 by justashooter